current_gameweek

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral context. It states the tool 'returns' data, implying no side effects, but does not detail output format, any prerequisites, or other behavioral traits. The absence of output schema means the description could offer more, but for a simple zero-param tool, a minimally adequate disclosure is provided.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that conveys all necessary information without any filler. It is front-loaded with the primary action and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's zero complexity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is nearly complete. It clarifies what is returned (current/next gameweek and deadline). However, it could specify the exact format (e.g., object with id and deadline timestamp) to be fully self-sufficient, but it is adequate for its simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4 per the guidelines. The description does not need to add parameter info, as there are none, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty schema).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Return' and the resource 'current (or next upcoming) FPL gameweek and its deadline'. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like recommend_players, my_squad, and make_transfer, which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to get the current/next gameweek) and, given the distinct sibling tools, alternative scenarios are clear. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or conditional guidance is provided, so it's rated slightly below perfect.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.